§ The result
HiBob leads Radancy by 5 points.
Under rubric v1.0, HiBob, filed under ATS-integrated, finishes on 46 and Radancy, filed under Sourcing, on 41, 5 points apart. HiBob leads 5 of the 7 criteria, including Article 11 Technical Documentation, while Radancy leads 1, including Data Governance Disclosure, and 1 is level. Article 11 Technical Documentation is both the widest raw gap and the heaviest weighted swing — HiBob 55, Radancy 42 — and at a 20% weight it carries 45% of the weighted advantage HiBob holds across the 5 criteria on that side of the table.
Vendor profile
HiBob
HiBob's Bob is an all-in-one HR platform whose Bob Hiring applicant tracking module uses AI to give each application an explainable match score against recruiter-defined criteria (AI CV Matching) and to draft job descriptions, interview scorecards and candidate emails.
Vendor profile
Radancy
Radancy is an enterprise talent acquisition cloud combining recruitment marketing, career sites and CRM with agentic AI that sources, screens, scores, ranks and schedules candidates, including one-way video screening inherited from its myInterview acquisition.
§ The record
HiBob is filed under ATS-integrated AI, Radancy under Candidate sourcing AI. They also share 1 secondary category: Screening.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Radancy is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | HiBob | Radancy |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Enterprise |
| Headquarters | GB | US |
| Founded | 2015 | 2006 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 44% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
HiBob 55 · Radancy 42
2.6 weighted points to HiBob
12% weight · 66% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
HiBob 47 · Radancy 36
1.3 weighted points to HiBob
15% weight · 84% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
HiBob 35 · Radancy 28
1.1 weighted points to HiBob
12% weight · 96% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
HiBob 63 · Radancy 57
0.7 weighted points to HiBob
15% weight · 99% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
HiBob 57 · Radancy 58
0.1 weighted points to Radancy
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
HiBob 61 · Radancy 60
0.1 weighted points to HiBob
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 6 figures above sum to +5.6 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 5.9 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +5 beside that +5.6.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is HiBob minus Radancy.
| Category | Weight | HiBob | Radancy | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 55 | 42 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 20 | 20 | - | - |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 35 | 28 | +7 | +1.1 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 57 | 58 | -1 | -0.1 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 63 | 57 | +6 | +0.7 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 47 | 36 | +11 | +1.3 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 61 | 60 | +1 | +0.1 |
| Total | 100% | 46 (F) | 41 (F) | +5 | +5.6 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | HiBob | Radancy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 1 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 6 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 29 | 7 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 16 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
HiBob has 36 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 29 with a source URL, 7 documented absences; Radancy has 22 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 16 with a source URL, 6 documented absences.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 58 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 36 for HiBob, across 4 distinct source domains, and 22 for Radancy, across 1 distinct source domain.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- HiBob last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Radancy last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next